Reading: Editorial: PIA Volume 23

Editorial

Editorial: PIA Volume 23

Author:

Hana Koriech

Institute of Archaeology, UCL, GB

About Hana

Hana graduated with a Masters in Archaeology from UCL in 2004, and is currently a PhD candidate researching archaeology in global cities, focusing on the development of archaeology, the impact of international and national policies and the level of society capital in the heritage sector.

Abstract

This year the UK celebrates the centenary of the 1913 Ancient Monuments Act. At the same time, actions of this century demonstrate that no archaeological site can be guaranteed the necessary protection regardless of its significance, and so risks being lost for future generations.

This year the UK celebrates the centenary of the 1913 Ancient Monuments Act. At the same
time, actions of this century demonstrate that no archaeological site can be guaranteed
the necessary protection regardless of its significance, and so risks being lost for
future generations. Protecting, understanding, preserving and conserving are not only
complex technical matters, but are complex contextual matters, whereby
the active or passive involvement by the Government and the public, the role of legal
frameworks, city and community interests, or larger political and economic agendas play
a massive part. In the UK, archaeologists have warned that the future of heritage is
threatened with thousands of sites in England at risk from neglect, decay and damage
– according to the Heritage at Risk register. The British Archaeological Trust
– Rescue – has responded to a recent report by the IHBC/ALGAO/EH’s
‘A fifth report on Local Authority Staff
Resources’1 and warn that
austerity cutbacks over the past years of Government are taking us closer to
‘reaching a point at which the provision of services designed to safeguard our
historic environment is no longer adequate’.2
In the US, we see the October Government Shutdown close more than 300 sites, such as
National Parks and Federal historic sites, museums and other cultural institutions
– indicating heritage’s expendability and vulnerability. Whether through
governance, development pressures (urban, rural and touristic), conflict and
catastrophe, lack of resources, or shifts in the practice itself, archaeology in various
countries across the globe has found itself in a difficult position. The World Monuments
Fund 2014 Watch announced 67 sites from 41 countries and territories
which are at risk from such natural, social, political and economic changes and
challenges.3

Having reached the 21st century, we need to be more proactive
than reactive than ever before. Cities are changing, growing, sprawling and indulging in
the heights and depths of a new age that can place it as a successful node on the global
map; yonder, buildings and sites are also potentially threatened by abandonment, forces
of nature, various conflicts such as looting and/or war, budgetary cuts and closing of
relative posts, or even by our very own ‘professional’ hands as a result of
financial and time pressures. Archaeology’s Armageddon seems to always be around
the next corner, and – to be fair – such paranoia is thriving with threats
proven to be very real indeed, seen in action here in the UK - and undoubtedly elsewhere
- through recent archaeological issues related to national governance, serious slashes
in funding and programmes, dismissive agendas and policies by politicians, and
increasing negligence towards sites.

Yet at the same time, inspiringly, recent years have seen a blossoming number of
fantastic projects and great efforts by fellow archaeologists and heritage specialists
both locally and globally. These initiatives are by no means minor but amount to the
collective response to current challenges highlighted above. World Heritage reminds us
after celebrating 40 years of the 1972 Convention that ‘the emphasis is on
solidarity, the shared aims and collective responsibility of the international
community…’ suggesting it ‘crucial that the international community
facilitate the exchange of experience and information…’.4 The PIA journal presents a pot of food-for-thought so that we can
be a part of a much-needed community of social capital. It is not about
‘publishing lest you perish’, but ‘publishing so as to flourish’
– we want to see and encourage dialogue, peer-review, open access and support.

This volume has been a very exciting endeavour, and the PIA team are very proud and
honoured to have worked together with fine contributors, peer-reviewers, and editors
– from our very own Institute of Archaeology as well as others around the world
– to finally bind it together in one collaborative effort, contributing new and
unique research to the greater voice. It is one tiny step forward on the path towards
more collaboration that awaits us all.

Working as part of the PIA team provides tremendous gratification: we witness some of the
very inspiring, developing and original work that researchers continue to dedicate their
time, energy and thought to, supported by a community that welcomes such new promising
research. People are continuing to give their time, patience, effort and support –
which truly has an incredible impact for both small and larger endeavours. We hope that
work of such nature can act as one of many vessels for networking, sharing and
communicating between each other both here at home and around the world.

Volume 23 touches on many hot topics. It’s about cities, but also relationships:
relationships between the city and archaeologist; between technology and archaeologist;
between conflict, literature, authority, and even the relationship between the
archaeology of then and now. The volume is also about thinking outside the box, and I am
happy to see many contributors raising questions and concerns about previously ignored
or easily overlooked areas.

Regarding our forum, led by archaeologist J. J. Carver, I must whole-heartedly thank all
the contributors from all over the world who took on the challenge of engaging in a
discussion well overdue. We have responses from the US, Mexico, Australia, Turkey,
Bermuda and the UK. It is our hope that the forum contributes towards open dialogue and
further engagement in managing archaeological sites within an urban context, through
being proactive, sharing experiences and examples, and reflections from around the
world.

The interview moves into a personal and charming recollection and reflection between
three friends - Drs. Cantwell, Rothschild, and Wall - who are amongst the first to be
involved with Urban Archaeology in New York City during the 1980s when archaeology began
to professionalise. Beginning with their first encounter in archaeology, they discuss
how they have seen archaeology change over time and their views on the direction of
archaeology. It was quite a unique experience to get these three tremendously
influential women together, and we hope that you enjoy the opportunity to see their more
personal side.

We then have an absolutely brilliant addition of Moshenska and Salamunovich’s
‘Wheeler at War’ comic strip, which we are so happy to include! We thank the
two for thinking of the PIA as a home for such work.

Remaining is a hefty volume of nine research papers, a report, and various reviews
presented, covering the range and creative direction that archaeology can take. We start
with Lorna Richardson’s article on Digital Public Archaeology, which discusses the
potential, role and issues that archaeology on the Internet faces, and what it has to
offer in reaching a wider global audience. Following, Jonathan Gardner considers –
in a fascinating study – the impact of ‘the fence’ during and after
London’s 2012 Games, and how such boundaries play a role in community. We are
happy to include Hadas Elber-Aviram, who took on the challenge of showing true
interdisciplinary scholarship by taking us on a journey into Urban Fantasy and how
archaeology and history may play a role in literature. Hanna Steyne offers us her
preliminary research on how we can understand individuals of the late 19th
century and the impact of the environment on communities, while Tina Paphitis presents
us with a fulfilling discussion about the relationship between folklore and archaeology
looking specifically at the site of Cadbury Castle and its folkloric connections with
King Arthur. We are also happy to welcome Samuel Hardy, who’s work in Cyprus has
provided us with some very insightful understanding of misrepresentation, memory,
amnesia and misguided practice that continues to have a very real presence today in
various countries. Leah Acheson Roberts takes us on various successful tours
demonstrating how sculpture can and should be considered as a valuable medium in
exhibitions and museums. We are left with two articles that are guests in our volume:
Paul Anthony Brazinski and Allegra R. P. Fryxell, and Kristine Ødeby are part of
the PIA’s upcoming Special Online Volume on Medieval Archaeology – and
promise a fascinating read, as the former discusses the function of smell and it’s
role on relic veneration and spiritual experience, whilst the latter analyses Viking
motifs and their reuse. We then have a report by Ahmed Mekawy Ouda who takes us on a
detective hunt as he pieces together the puzzle of a tiny artefact, inscribed with the
name of Werethekau ‘Great of Magic’.

I leave you here to explore the volume and am certain you will find many fascinating
papers we hope will encourage further inspiration, collaborative work and contribution
to the field. I send my most sincere thanks to the contributors for their enthusiasm,
commitment, patience and– in many ways – being a key part of the team. I
would also like to thank the peer-reviewers, who remain anonymous yet selflessly
dedicate time and energy to offer their expertise and assistance ensuring that the
journal continue with work of high merit and standard. Lastly, I would like to thank the
PIA team, Ubiquity Press and the copy-editors who also volunteered their free time
within their hectic schedules to help make this possible.

In return, we hope that this journal continues to be a vehicle that encourages and
supports your work, efforts and success.

Hana K

PIA Senior Editor

October 2013

Notes

1English Heritage, the Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers and
the Institute of Historic Buildings Conservation (July 2013). 2013
Annual Report on Local Authority Staff Resources retrieved online
at: http://ihbc.org.uk/skills/resources/5th-rep-LAStaff.pdf